![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 15 of 15. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by madeline on June 21, 2006, at 17:49:35
How can one poster call someone a sh*t faced bastard with no sanction.
Yet another says in their opinion that the world would be a better place without religion and gets blocked?
What is I called George Bush a sh*t faced bastard?
Posted by Dinah on June 21, 2006, at 18:17:53
In reply to Application of the rules., posted by madeline on June 21, 2006, at 17:49:35
I't's ok you know. You can say Dinah said it.
DINAH SAID HER THERAPIST WAS A SH*T FACED B*STARD. THERE EVERYONE KNOWS IT NOW.
My understanding of the civility rules are that if my therapist were a poster here at Babble, or if he had supporters here at Babble, then I shouldn't be able to give my unbridled opinion of him.
If Dr Bob wishes to PBC me, he will. I was following the rules as I understood them. if i was mistaneklo i was wmistaken.
However you can reset assyred that i wilol mever ever give my opinion of my therapist or my morhter or anyon e esel here on babbel again;.
Posted by Dinah on June 21, 2006, at 19:34:30
In reply to Application of the rules., posted by madeline on June 21, 2006, at 17:49:35
I'm sorry. I was suprised.
On a calmer note, I think that if Dr. Bob enforced the civility guidelines for our pdocs, therapists, bosses, spouses, etc. there would soon be nothing to talk about.
That's not the only or even most uncivil thing I've ever said about him. In fact, he knows about it.
If Dr. Bob would like to change the civility rules to apply to our therapists, pdocs, spouses, bosses, coworkers, and the lady in traffic who cut us off, that's fine and I'll abide by it.
Until then, I feel relatively secure in what I said.
Posted by gardenergirl on June 21, 2006, at 19:35:21
In reply to Application of the rules., posted by madeline on June 21, 2006, at 17:49:35
> What is I called George Bush a sh*t faced bastard?Assuming you mean "if", the post would be deemed uncivil. There are most definitely people here who support Pres. Bush. In addition, the liklihood that someone would feel hurt by that is reasonably much higher than the liklihood that someone would feel hurt about Dinah's T being called that. I think the above would pass a reasonable person test.
For what it's worth.
Are you angry with Dinah?
gg
Posted by gardenergirl on June 21, 2006, at 19:36:10
In reply to Re: Application of the rules. » madeline, posted by Dinah on June 21, 2006, at 19:34:30
Posted by Dinah on June 21, 2006, at 19:37:29
In reply to ((((((Dinah))))))) (nm) » Dinah, posted by gardenergirl on June 21, 2006, at 19:36:10
I'm on my way to a nap now.
Posted by henrietta on June 21, 2006, at 20:14:43
In reply to Application of the rules., posted by madeline on June 21, 2006, at 17:49:35
I agree. I don't think, in the interests of civility, that one should be allowed to call ANYONE a sfb here. How in X's name is that civil? It doesn't matter if the person in question reads this board. It's about the climate of civility, it's about appropiate public behavior. It's about general karma, not narrow little interpretations of civility. This came up years ago here, and to my great astonishment Bob indicated you could pretty much say anything you wanted about anyone who was "NOT A MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY". I recall at the time I protested vehemently about the dangers of this attitude, an attitude which has caused immense suffering on this planet for thousands of years.
H^ll, it's not even about civility---it's about morality.
Posted by gardenergirl on June 21, 2006, at 22:24:25
In reply to Re: Application of the rules., posted by henrietta on June 21, 2006, at 20:14:43
> It's about general karma, not narrow little interpretations of civility.
Actually, it really is about applying the civility guidelines. Karma's way too big of a thing for any of the deputies or even Dr. Bob to take responsibility for.
gg
Posted by henrietta on June 22, 2006, at 9:25:20
In reply to Re: Application of the rules. » henrietta, posted by gardenergirl on June 21, 2006, at 22:24:25
I am guilty of having made an assumption. The assumption was that it was obvious I was stating an opinion. So, to clarify: For me it's about whatever I say it's about for me.
Posted by gardenergirl on June 22, 2006, at 10:35:27
In reply to Re: Application of the rules. » gardenergirl, posted by henrietta on June 22, 2006, at 9:25:20
Posted by madeline on June 22, 2006, at 11:04:39
In reply to Re: Application of the rules. » madeline, posted by Dinah on June 21, 2006, at 19:34:30
I could tell you were surprised and I meant no offense at all by my post.
In fact, I'm glad things worked out for you and your therapist.
Maddie
Posted by madeline on June 22, 2006, at 11:08:38
In reply to Re: Application of the rules. » madeline, posted by gardenergirl on June 21, 2006, at 19:35:21
Perhaps it would pass the reasonable person test, but I'm not sure it should, but then again, I'm not sure that it shouldn't either.
I don't know.
The rules seem to come to such a fine point sometimes that they seem almost arbitrary.
And, no, I am not at all angry at Dinah.
Posted by gardenergirl on June 24, 2006, at 3:30:49
In reply to Re: Application of the rules., posted by madeline on June 22, 2006, at 11:08:38
>
> The rules seem to come to such a fine point sometimes that they seem almost arbitrary.It's difficult to figure out where that point is at times.
>
> And, no, I am not at all angry at Dinah.I'm glad. Just wondering.
Thanks,
gg
Posted by henrietta on June 27, 2006, at 19:18:39
In reply to Of course it is (nm) » henrietta, posted by gardenergirl on June 22, 2006, at 10:35:27
are they not?
I don't have time now to go into it, but someday I hope I do have the time and interest to offer some constructive feedback about how your manner, as a future therapist, might be perceived by at least some intelligent and sensitive folk, and what changes you could make in the direction of a potentially more positive outcome for both you and your clients.
Posted by gardenergirl on June 28, 2006, at 10:22:54
In reply to Actually and Of Course are interesting words. » gardenergirl, posted by henrietta on June 27, 2006, at 19:18:39
> are they not?
Of course they are.
>
> I don't have time now to go into it, but someday I hope I do have the time and interest to offer some constructive feedback... .I always welcome constructive feedback, and I will consider any offered when you find the time to get to li'l ol' me.
While I acknowledge that you feel you have advice to offer which could apply in another context, I prefer to remain genuine and to strive for authenticity. I find it much less complicated and more meaningful to be myself while adapting my behavior to the various social norms and demand characteristics presented in each different context.
And about unsolicited feedback: I've learned that quite often this type of feedback is more likely to be about filling a need of the giver of the feedback versus the needs of the receiver.
Regards,
gg
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.